Today's far-reaching report on surveillance in Britain highlights six crucial areas where the balance between the powers to spy and privacy are under the greatest strain.

The National DNA Database

The report is highly critical of the current arrangements that allow the state to store and retain indefinitely the DNA data of anyone questioned by the police, with the result that an estimated 7.39% of the population are now included on the national database.

"We believe that DNA should only be retained on the database where it can be shown that such retention is justified or deserved," the report says.

The report also refers to a recent case at the European court of human rights, which found the government to be in breach of the right to a private and family life as a result of the database.

"We expect the government to comply fully, and as soon as possible, with the judgment of the European court of human rights," the report says.

CCTV

There are "few restrictions" and no clear legal limit to the use of public area CCTV cameras and the data collected by them, the report says, with the result that "local authorities and the police are in principle free to use CCTV cameras for general, unrecorded surveillance".

The UK "leads the world" in its use of CCTV, with about 4m cameras in action, and up to 78% of the crime prevention budget having been spent on CCTV in recent years. The report criticises the lack of clear understanding as to how beneficial this reliance on CCTV is to the prevention of crime, and recommends the government undertakes an independent appraisal of research into its use.

The report also recommends new laws to regulate the use of CCTV in the public and private sectors. It further recommends "codes of practice that are legally binding on all CCTV schemes, and a system of complaints and remedies".

Covert surveillance by councils

The report describes the use of covert surveillance by local authorities as "well-publicised", alluding to the widely reported cases of councils monitoring residents on a wide range of issues including fly tipping and dog fouling.

The report said it was concerned by this, adding that a proposed consultation into the use of these powers by local authorities did not go far enough.

"The government ... should consider whether local authorities, rather than the police, are the appropriate bodies to exercise such powers," the report recommends. "Such powers should only be available for the investigation of serious criminal offences which would attract a custodial sentence of at least two years."

Lack of oversight by public bodies

The police, security services and other law enforcement agencies have powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) to gather covert surveillance data. Although the police have complained that RIPA places "an excessive burden of unnecessary bureaucracy", civil liberties groups have condemned it for failing to go far enough to provide effective safeguards on the use of this data.

"We are concerned about the level of independent and effective oversight of surveillance activities under RIPA," the report says. "We consider that more should be done to protect the privacy of individuals from over-zealous state surveillance."

The report recommends a system of judicial oversight for surveillance carried out by public authorities, and that those individuals who are subject to surveillance should have the right to be informed about the surveillance used against them, providing this would not harm any investigations.

Encryption of personal data

The volume of personal data now held by the state, as well as the recent incidents of data loss - which according to experts made 2008 "the worst year ever for data accidents" - was singled out as an area of concern in the report.

"The routine collection and storage of personal data makes individuals vulnerable to criminal organisations stealing and misusing their information," the report says. "The encryption of personal data should be mandatory in some circumstances."

Privacy impact statements

The report suggests that one of the government's failures is a lack of assessment as to what the implications of surveillance measures are for privacy.

It recommends mandatory "privacy impact assessments", which would require a structured assessment of the implications for privacy at an early stage, before new surveillance measures are introduced. These should be independent, publicly available, full and detailed, the report says, and conducted prior to the adoption of any new surveillance, data collection or processing scheme.

Similar measures should also be considered for the private sector, the report suggests.